• Arthroscopy · Jan 2018

    Comparative Study

    Similar 30-Day Complications for Septic Knee Arthritis Treated With Arthrotomy or Arthroscopy: An American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Analysis.

    • Patawut Bovonratwet, Stephen J Nelson, Kirthi Bellamkonda, Nathaniel T Ondeck, Blake N Shultz, Michael J Medvecky, and Jonathan N Grauer.
    • Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, U.S.A.
    • Arthroscopy. 2018 Jan 1; 34 (1): 213-219.

    PurposeThe purpose of the current study was to use the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) to determine whether there were differences in 30-day perioperative complications between open arthrotomy and arthroscopy for the treatment of septic knees in a large national sample.MethodsPatients who were diagnosed with a septic knee and underwent open arthrotomy or arthroscopy were identified in the 2005-2014 NSQIP data sets. Patient demographics and perioperative complications were characterized and compared between the 2 procedures.ResultsIn total, 168 patients undergoing knee arthrotomy and 216 patients undergoing knee arthroscopy for septic knee were identified. There were no statistically significant differences in demographic variables between the 2 groups. On univariate analysis, the rate of minor adverse events (MAEs; 15.48% vs 8.80%, P = .043) was higher in the open arthrotomy treatment group, while the rate of serious adverse events (SAEs; 37.50% vs 26.19%, P = .019) was higher in the arthroscopic surgery treatment group. On multivariate analysis, which controlled for patient characteristics/comorbidities and used the Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons, there were no statistically significant differences in risk of any adverse events (relative risk [RR] = 0.851; 99% confidence interval [CI], 0.598-1.211; P = .240), MAE (RR = 1.653; 99% CI, 0.818-3.341; P = .066), SAE (RR = 0.706; 99% CI, 0.471-1.058; P = .027), return to the operating room (RR = 0.810; 99% CI, 0.433-1.516; P = .387), or readmission (RR = 1.022; 99% CI, 0.456-2.294; P = .944) between open compared with arthroscopic surgery.ConclusionsUnivariate analysis revealed a lower rate of MAE but a higher rate of SAE in the arthroscopic surgery treatment group. However, on multivariate analysis, similar perioperative complications, rate of return to the operating room, and rate of readmission were found after open and arthroscopic debridement for septic knees. Based on the lack of demonstrated superiority of either of these 2 treatment modalities for this given diagnosis, and the expectation that most differences in perioperative complications for this diagnosis would have declared themselves within the first 30 days, deciding between the studied treatment modalities may be based more on other factors not included in this study.Level Of EvidenceRetrospective comparative study, Level III.Copyright © 2017 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…